Nikkor 15mm f/5.6 Ai

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I have an opportunity to buy the Nikkor 15mm f/5.6 Ai ultra wide lens. There is not so much information to be found, but there is some on K. Rockwell as well as on mir.com and in various forums.</p>

<p>What I found was the the 15mm f/5.6 was introduced in 1973 with a 15 elements in 12 groups design. In 1976 the lens design was changed to a 14 elements in 12 groups design. A year or so later, in 1977, it was upgraded with automatic indexing, Ai.</p>

<p>In 1979 it was replaced by the 15mm f/3.5 Ai, which was later upgraded to Ai-s in 1982. The lens was discontinued in 2006.</p>

<p>The lens I am considering appear to be the 15mm f/5.6 Ai. It is in very good optical condition, but there some scratches and paint that has been scraped off the barrel, especially the locking button for filter change.</p>

<p>The lens has filters built in behind the front lens. By turning a ring, a yellow, orange or red filter can be chosen. Obviously the option of no filter is available too.</p>

<p>There seem to be different and conflicting opinions, but it seems like it in general is less sharp than modern lenses like the 14-24/2.8, but that it is fairly sharp corner to corner at f/8 and f/11.</p>

<p>The distortion is supposed to be virtually zero.</p>

<p>All these older ultra wide angles are prone to ghosting. Some say that the 15mm f/3.5 is not even suitable to use outside. I have seen reports that the f/5.6 Ai is less prone to ghosting than the newer f/3.5 lenses.</p>

<p>I have heard that split prisms are not preferred, because they make the viewfinder even darker.</p>

<p>I have also heard that the built in filters tend to age.</p>

<p>My question is: Is there anyone out there with first hand experience who can either support or oppose these claims?</p>

<p>I appreciate any piece of information.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>Jonas</p>

<p>No experience, but maybe a different take on it...<br>

As much as I like old(er) Nikkors, and mainly shoot with those, the wider the angle gets, the more I get drawn to more modern optics. There has been too much improvement there, really. If I'd want something this wide, I'd go for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8. Yes, it's large-ish, but reviews are quite favourable, it's 2 stops faster and it's pretty affordable too. I'd consider it, at least.<br>

<em>(for the record, my widest lens at present is a 20mm f/3.5AiS, which I like a lot for its small size, pleasant rendering and flare-resistancy. But I know it's far from the sharpest knife in the drawer, and it's actually one of the more reasonable performing wide angles of yesteryear)</em></p>

<p>All the comments on this lens is correct. I haw had the AI-S version, superb if you don't have a harsh light in the side. Then the lens can flare badly. Supper wide angle shot is good, interior very problematic specially if you have a bright window, or light, outside the composition. I don't have the lens anymore, I haw the 14/2.8 ED prime, which is "almost" as good as the 14-24/2.8 ED. The zoom is superior, I used, bur sold, because I didn't liked the bulk of it, and I never used the zoom option, all the time on the 14 mm setting. Get tired of it and get back to the prime 14/2.8 ED. Why I needed a s.w. zoom to 24 mm, when I get the superior 24-70/2.8 ED all ready? You not going to like it. The lens is beautiful, compact and strong metal design, do not clear the front element to much, eves the slighter micro scratches incresing the ghosting of the lens. The filters you don't needed today, it is down in the processing today. The depth of field is almost infinite on all the apertures. Tricky to work with it. Save money for the 14 mm f/2.8 ED.</p>

<p>Hi Wouter. I haw the 20 mm f/3.5 and the f/4 ai-s and I like them very much. They are a gem of the wide AI lens design, and extremely small and compact lenses. I used them very often.</p>

<p>I now have a Vivitar 19-35 zoom in AI mount. That is the widest I have, but only recently and I haven't seen pictures from it yet. (Just finished the roll.)</p>

<p>Previously my widest is the Nikon AI 24/2.8, which I really like and have used for years. </p>

<p>There aren't that many uses for super wide, but when you need one they are nice to have.</p>

<p>Glen, I had the Cosina-branded version of 19-35mm zoom - probably still got it hidden away somewhere. It wasn't bad for its era in terms of central resolution and contrast, but distortion and field curvature at the short end were pretty horrendous.</p>

<p>Jonas, on the whole I agree with Wouter; that things have moved on a lot, and a modern lens will most likely walk all over a superwide designed in the last century.</p>

<p>Regarding the Samyang 14mm: My experience with Samyang lenses has been variable. Most of my samples are excellent ( I have the 24mm, 35mm and 85mm @ f/1.4, and the 135mm f/2 Samyang lenses), but I had to return the 24mm for replacement due to very bad decentring. I've also had my hands on trade samples of their 14mm f/2.8 and 24mm T/S lenses that showed very good performance, and OTOH I've seen some very poor review results from both those lenses. So I suspect that sample variability is very wide. My advice if buying Samyang would be to use a dealer that has a good returns/exchange policy.</p>

<p>From my brief use of Samyang's 14mm f/2.8 I'd say it would beat the old AI 15mm Nikkor - providing you get a good sample.</p>

<p>I use the 15/3.5 and I can confirm the best aperture is f/8~f/11. Lens is also prone to flare, and you must shield with your hand to avoid blue washes originating from the sky. It is excellent indoors, as everything will fit in the frame. As to people pictures, it will distort those sitting near the frame sides considerably and make them fatter. So keeping people in the center is a better idea.</p>

<p>Wouter,</p>

<p>You're obviously right that the newer lenses are performing better. However, this is still a pretty cool lens that would have a nice place in my AI/AI-s collection.</p>

<p>Well, the guy got cold feet and the lens is not longer for sale, so problem solved.</p>

<p>Thanks everybody for your input!</p>

<p>The 15mm f/5.6 AIS is a rather esoteric lens. It's greatest attribute is that there is essentially <em>no distortion</em>, straight lines remain straight. It's greatest weakness, however, is a fairly bad tendency to ghost if there is a strong point light source in the image and flare if there is a broader bright light source. Under the right lighting conditions it can produce some very good images.</p>

I owned one for awhile while doing architectural work. I also have owned the 14mm, but currently

own the 14-24mm f/2.8. The 15mm had straighter lines and was a very good lens. Mine was an AI. I

got rid of it after buying a d200 some years ago. It had purple fringe around highlight areas, but was

sharp and contrasty. My feeling is the newer lenses may assume the software will correct barrel

distortion, but it does add an extra PP step. Though the 15mm is built like a tank, the CA cod be a

deal killer, though my lighting was pretty controlled for architectural work. If used for landscape, I

would lrobably buy a newer 14mm. There are pros and cons to each.

I slowly made my trek through wide, to super wide. I bought a 35mm f2.8, 28mm f3.5, 20mm f4 and then my Wife bought me a 15mm f3.5 AIS for a gift

for our Wedding. The 20mm f4 is simply an amazing lens. It doesn't look like any special when you pick it up, but its performance was dramatic.

Then I got the 15mm f3.5 AIS. I've got to tell you. I saw Ken Rockwell's reviews and others who say it Ghost Flares like crazy. I never experienced it.

Of course, some common sense has to be used with this type of lens to begin with. If you keep it level, there's absolutely NO distortion. If you want to

induce it, just tilt it up or down to get the effect. After using it, I can tell a lot of photos you see like sweeping images of a Bahama Beach shots definitely

are taken with this type super wide lens. I like to put something right up front and the background and both images are perfectly in focus due to its wide

focusing range. The older 15mm f5.6 is I'm sure a winner too, but I never got a chance to shoot with one. I almost bought one at Ken Rockwell's in NYC

showroom. It was a used one. He wanted $550, but he pointed out that one of the tiny lens near the back of the lens had a crack in it. That lens was probably

7 years old at that point and I don't think Nikon had the replacement parts for it. Even if they did, I'm sure the cost would have at least doubled to have it repaired.

in my opinion, the older Nikkors were just built better. A lot of the newer Nikkors just feel like plastic. When you pick-up one of these lens, you can see and feel the quality that was built-in. Back in the 80's, I had a relative at Nikon USA in Garden City, NY. I had all my older Nikkors converted to Ai at that time. The cost were really

low but it was worth it. Good luck with your choice !!

I love a wide angle and for a long time shot a 20/3.5 in the newspaper business. It finally made the editor so angry he ran me off. I didn’t like him either. No idea where he is now but I know exactly where the lens is sitting.

 

Rick H.

Pictures are better than words:

 

nikon nikkor 55mm 3.5 K D810 15mm 3.5 ais 15mm 5.6 ai body by Rafael Batlle, on Flickr

 

nikon nikkor 15mm 5.6 D800 Lake hodges scrub oaks by Rafael Batlle, on Flickr

 

san juan capistrano 15mm qdc ai 5.6 f5.6 nikon nikkor D3 3 by Rafael Batlle, on Flickr

Beautiful pieces of engineering rafa.

nikon nikkor 55mm 3.5 K D810 15mm 3.5 ais 15mm 5.6 ai body

Err, typo? 55mm should read 15mm????